Pittsburgh Steelers Official Off-Topic Thread: Mark XIII War is a PIMP;Jrm fails

Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Us planners are that line that tell these companies where and where not to build. We make sure that there are no skyscrapers near airports. We preserve farms. And in my current Comprehensive Plan I'm writing in more stipulations that help small businesses start and thrive. I have the ability to create tax breaks for those small companies, and place harsher taxes on bigger companies.

You give some great examples of why government is needed. Granted, these are at the local level, and even conservatives are okay with government at the local level, but I think there are logical corollaries at higher levels of government as well. For those curious, that might include environmental protection, consumer protection (for example, FDA), and protecting future generations.

Originally Posted by warfelg

On that note I can give a brief example of what I mean. In the borough I manage most the planning we have quite a few vacant, run down townhomes. I have created a section of the plan where if your a small business owner and you buy that building within a certain number of yards of the square, you don't pay property taxed for 10 years if you use that building for your business. If any national chain or big box store tries to buy into the townhome or and open lot within borough limits they have to pay an 'advertisement' tax (like charging McD for putting the golden arches along the road in a light up sign), that essentially doubles their property tax.

I have to question the decision to charge big box stores an "advertisement tax". If the goal is to redevelop a rundown area by bringing in jobs and tax revenue, then surely there are better plans. Maybe rather than giving them "no property tax for 10 years", you give them "50% property tax for 5 years". It still provides the incentive for job creators to come to the area, but you're not hamstringing your revenue as much. If I was thinking about opening a big box franchise and bringing jobs to your area and you were going to charge me double the property tax to do so, I'd look elsewhere in a heartbeat and those jobs and that updated facade* would not be coming to your area.

* Looks matter more than you might think. Sociology points to a study that saw crime increase and standard of living decrease in an area when broken windows stopped being fixed. It stands to reason that having a big box company move in and spend their money creating a nicer facade will lead to a nicer neighborhood and a decrease in the crime rate.

You give some great examples of why government is needed. Granted, these are at the local level, and even conservatives are okay with government at the local level, but I think there are logical corollaries at higher levels of government as well. For those curious, that might include environmental protection, consumer protection (for example, FDA), and protecting future generations.

I have to question the decision to charge big box stores an "advertisement tax". If the goal is to redevelop a rundown area by bringing in jobs and tax revenue, then surely there are better plans. Maybe rather than giving them "no property tax for 10 years", you give them "50% property tax for 5 years". It still provides the incentive for job creators to come to the area, but you're not hamstringing your revenue as much. If I was thinking about opening a big box franchise and bringing jobs to your area and you were going to charge me double the property tax to do so, I'd look elsewhere in a heartbeat and those jobs and that updated facade* would not be coming to your area.

* Looks matter more than you might think. Sociology points to a study that saw crime increase and standard of living decrease in an area when broken windows stopped being fixed. It stands to reason that having a big box company move in and spend their money creating a nicer facade will lead to a nicer neighborhood and a decrease in the crime rate.

Just my two cents.

This is called the "Broken Windows Theory" orginally made by james wilson and george Kellen, the findings over the years found that there was a small increase in petty crimes. Such as skateboarding, loitering, prostitution. They wasn't a increase in serious crimes such as murder etc, and no major change in living standards, well it is better to fix them the study your referring to has been questioned by many researchers and doesn't hold up to the facts reported by crime data tools like the UCR etc.
sociology also isn't the best place to look for those results criminology research is much more fitting.

This is called the "Broken Windows Theory" orginally made by james wilson and george Kellen, the findings over the years found that there was a small increase in petty crimes. Such as skateboarding, loitering, prostitution. They wasn't a increase in serious crimes such as murder etc, and no major change in living standards, well it is better to fix them the study your referring to has been questioned by many researchers and doesn't hold up to the facts reported by crime data tools like the UCR etc.
sociology also isn't the best place to look for those results criminology research is much more fitting.

Fair enough. I was vaguely aware of the theory, but hadn't followed up on any of the subsequent studies/findings.

I have to question the decision to charge big box stores an "advertisement tax". If the goal is to redevelop a rundown area by bringing in jobs and tax revenue, then surely there are better plans. Maybe rather than giving them "no property tax for 10 years", you give them "50% property tax for 5 years". It still provides the incentive for job creators to come to the area, but you're not hamstringing your revenue as much. If I was thinking about opening a big box franchise and bringing jobs to your area and you were going to charge me double the property tax to do so, I'd look elsewhere in a heartbeat and those jobs and that updated facade* would not be coming to your area.

* Looks matter more than you might think. Sociology points to a study that saw crime increase and standard of living decrease in an area when broken windows stopped being fixed. It stands to reason that having a big box company move in and spend their money creating a nicer facade will lead to a nicer neighborhood and a decrease in the crime rate.

Just my two cents.

I can tell you amazingly despite the tax we still have big box stores that want to come in. Our goal was to keep away some of the big box stores that are cost conscious. A great example is my are already has 4 Walmarts. There are already 2 within ten miles of the borough we are trying my pilot program in. Because we charge them for that and won't let them have a single story building (by limiting commercial lot size) they decided to stay away.

Now we have had a few national chains (where a branch is individually owned and operated), pony up the cash for an investor to come in and build a branch. We're ok with that.

And I am aware of the broken windows theory. Thats what actually kicked off my entire idea to start this pilot program. I talked to many entrepreneurs that have had failed businesses and asked them what some of the biggest holdups where. Their answers and concerns were:
1) Large nationwide chains never felt any resistance to open just a block from when their business was.
2) Because of the stiff taxes and building charges associated with building in older places they never had the capitol to invest in the building.
3) They didn't have the resources to invest in training like the big brands.

So my goal with the two taxes (and trust me I only explained a sliver of it, the actual thing is 35 pages) was to aide small businesses in numbers 1 & 2. Our economic studies showed that the revenue from on street parking, sales and employment taxes, and various other small streams far outweighed the income from the property tax we miss out on.

Our goal is to largely increase our local economy, and although no single store has opened in Q3 projections we already see an increase. In doing all the construction our 'ma and pa' business owners have selected all local products.

Well I can say part of the problem with privatizing planning is we basically act as stewards of the law much in the way police officers do. Planning and zoning are all laws that many planners write (in the form of STIP TIPP and Comprehensive Plans). What happens then is private companies come in and share their plans for the land with us. We make sure that these plans fit within the vision and fall in with all codes.

I'm not saying we make everything look the same but we ensure that there is a uniform vision in the look of a borough or township.

Now without us imagine that any company can buy any plot of land and do as they please. You have a beautiful house in the middle of suburbia. A waste company buys the plot next to you and decides to make it a landfill. All the sudden your house has no value, you can't stop them from doing so, and there is no voice to oppose that company.

Us planners are that line that tell these companies where and where not to build. We make sure that there are no skyscrapers near airports. We preserve farms. And in my current Comprehensive Plan I'm writing in more stipulations that help small businesses start and thrive. I have the ability to create tax breaks for those small companies, and place harsher taxes on bigger companies.

On that note I can give a brief example of what I mean. In the borough I manage most the planning we have quite a few vacant, run down townhomes. I have created a section of the plan where if your a small business owner and you buy that building within a certain number of yards of the square, you don't pay property taxed for 10 years if you use that building for your business. If any national chain or big box store tries to buy into the townhome or and open lot within borough limits they have to pay an 'advertisement' tax (like charging McD for putting the golden arches along the road in a light up sign), that essentially doubles their property tax.

So basically without me imagine you live in an area the gets rid of the police force and hires private security to do everything.

Sorry for the length of the post...

I forgot you were in planning. It makes perfect sense for this to be ran through the local government. Heck my uncle is a planning manager so I'm well aware of the intricacies of your job. I'm certainly not an anarchist so I believe there is a role for government in society, just not to the point where businesses are heckled with taxes and regulations so that it becomes more difficult for them to gain a profit.

Obviously my other comment holds little water in your case, but my general argument that individuals and small businesses spur the economy, and not government, remains the same.

I forgot you were in planning. It makes perfect sense for this to be ran through the local government. Heck my uncle is a planning manager so I'm well aware of the intricacies of your job. I'm certainly not an anarchist so I believe there is a role for government in society, just not to the point where businesses are heckled with taxes and regulations so that it becomes more difficult for them to gain a profit.

Obviously my other comment holds little water in your case, but my general argument that individuals and small businesses spur the economy, and not government, remains the same.

Oh on your last point I agree 150%. It's all about the small business and individuals to spur the economy. We can't think from the top down as a nation anymore. Care about your local community. Invest in the local economy. The plus side is the people the profit from it you know directly. It's not a faceless corporation. Now I understand in some cases it's hard (food stamps, poor college student) to shop local because of the price, but we should all try to support them. I feel with my role as a local government employee we have part of the responsibility to aide the small business to succeed.

Since neither republicans or democrats seem to care, I choose to be Independent. This allows me to keep my views with no compromising.